Goolam Muhammed Suliman Vawda, 49, has been using the social media alias @goolammv to discredit and threaten journalists, government officials, entrepreneurs, and politicians from South Africa for six years. Picture: Supplied
OPINION: The exposure and the unmasking of the sock puppet is a great development and great news for media freedom in the country, writes Edmond Phiri.
The Independent Media and IOL Editors deserve great praise for their recent exposé of the "Goolam" racist sock puppet, now confirmed as Goolam Muhammed Suliman Vawda.
This revelation is far more significant than just unmasking an online persona, but sheds light on a concerted disinformation campaign of targeted smear attacks against specific black individuals, while simultaneously promoting others.
The past six months have seen a dramatic escalation in these attacks, especially against the Independent Media's chairperson, Dr Iqbal Surve, and the media house itself, including IOL.
Why was Independent Media the only media house singled out for attacks by Goolam? The balanced reporting on the Government of National Unity (GNU) seems to have angered those who wanted uniform reporting around it, especially Goolam.
It resulted in IOL logos being defaced, media house accusations of running "fake news," and a relentless onslaught of orchestrated attacks from fake accounts, trolls, and bots — all led by Goolam.
The sock puppet even veered close to calling for a "cancel culture" against IOL, accusing them of "driving racial divide" after they exposed the racist videos of DA MP Renaldo Gouws.
Was the unmasking of Goolam flawless? No. Independent Media initially misidentified a University of Kwa-Zulu Natal lecturer who shares the same name with Goolam as the culprit.
However, upon realising their error, Independent Media promptly apologised to Muhammed Vawda and corrected the record. The sincere apology demonstrates responsible journalism, prioritising truth over sensationalism or personal vendettas. It contrasts sharply with their competitor media outlets, who often double down when they’ve made mistakes, just to maintain an illusion of infallibility.
As it stands, an article about former President Jacob Zuma's alleged Dubai residence remains online on TimesMedia, despite Zuma's protests that the story was false. The Sunday Times has not issued a correction or an apology, even after the story was widely debunked.
This is not an isolated incident. The Press Council rulings against outlets like Daily Maverick, TimesLive, and News24 read like a hall of shame with a litany of journalistic failures, highlighting the fact that even other established media houses are not immune to making errors.
What is interesting though, is the competitor media houses parading as paragons of morality and virtue. The Daily Maverick, known for its rivalry with Independent Media, was quick to attack the IOL on the initial misidentification. Yet, this posturing ignores their own litany of shame and many of their Press Council losses – where they get so many things wrong. Their attack was less about accuracy and more about discrediting their media competitor.
For me, Independent Media's swift and sincere apology is most commendable. It showed Ubuntu. The Independent acknowledged that errors are human and took responsibility, quickly correcting them. The confirmation of the right Goolam is there now and couldn’t have come at the right time.
Accusations about Goolam's identity are not new and have circled social media for some time. Tasneem Carrim of the GCIS and former SARS spokesperson Adrian Lackay were initially suspected of running the account, yet mainstream media remained silent.
When Insight Factor journalist Modibe Modiba's tweeted that Goolam could be the two, Ishmail Abramjee refuted it, stating that he knew Tasneem and Goolam personally, therefore, those were not Goolam.
The tide turned in the first week of July when Sunday Independent Editor Sizwe Dlamini published an article titled “Goolam the 'Apartheid Spy', DA, Ramaphosa, and Troll Farms: Unmasking Smear Campaigns and Information Operations”. The in-depth article exposed Goolam's modus operandi and Surve revealing that there was an ongoing investigation against the sock puppet. This sparked panic in Goolam's camp, with Ishmail Abramjee frantically tweeting about Goolam's right to free speech.
Ironically, Abramjee himself made a similar mistake to Independent Media's, misidentifying and posting the wrong picture of Sizwe Dlamini as the author of the article. The tweet with the wrong Dlamini remains on his timeline.
The most compelling evidence and confirmation came in the immediate aftermath of Goolam's unmasking with his correct photo, and the frantic tweets that followed. Within a few minutes, the account tweeted, “For my safety and my family’s safety I have decided to take a break from these these. Apparently they have put a price of one million rands on my head. I guess they won.” A GIF saying “bye, I’ll miss you” was attached. The tweet was deleted some 6 minutes later, and Goolam immediately blocked his account, although temporarily.
His uncharacteristic silence followed. Furthermore, an Abramjee tweet and confirmation followed, “How was he caught? He used his real name and real initials. He used his constitutionally guaranteed rights to express himself and did so forcefully.” Goolam Muhammed Vawda surfaced a day and a half later now with strange incoherent tweets confirming he has left the country, “fearing for his life”. With Goolam unmasked, lawsuits and arrests must follow. The weaponisation of the sock puppet against politicians and targeted individuals is going to come to an end.
Goolam was no "fighter against corruption." Tweets supporting corruption-accused individuals like Khusela Diko and dismissing the Phala Phala scandal expose a clear bias. On the Phala-phala matter, where the Parliamentary Panel led by retired Chief Justice Ngcobo, Goolam tweeted, “The entire Phala Phala story was made up by the criminal Arthur Fraser together with Zuma, Malema and others. It failed RAMAPHOSA IS CLEAN. They tried everything to stay out of prison, but they failed. The end is very near for all of them.” This is a far sign from someone “fighting corruption”, or holding public officers to account. Goolam defended corruption when it was committed by those he supported, so the narrative that he was a corruption activist is pathetic.
This sock puppet was a rogue operative, likely controlled by those seeking to undermine media freedom and the right to free speech through propaganda and smear tactics. The exposure and the unmasking of the sock puppet is a great development and great news for media freedom in the country. The coordinated attacks against Independent Media were an asymmetrical strategy to undermine and destroy the media brand using propaganda and smear. The Independent Media was targeted because its editorial did not align with Goolam, or those who control the sock puppet.
Independent Media's editors and the country should focus on the larger victory. They have struck a blow against a disinformation campaign network that sought to silence dissenting voices. The Gupta Bell Pottinger disinformation network pales in comparison to the busted Goolam operation, which is a big threat to media freedom, and general freedoms.
* Edmond Phiri is an independent commentator and analyst.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Independent Media or IOL.